Global emissions effects of CDM projects with relative baselines
CDM is an offset mechanism designed to reduce the overall cost of implementing a given global target for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Annex B countries of the Kyoto Protocol. A problem with CDM is that it provides incentives to increase, if possible, the baseline emissions for CDM projects, to optimize the value of CDM credits. Under a “relative baselines” crediting rule, the CDM may also unduly increase energy consumption even during the CDM implementation phase. Less than full offset of emissions is then likely, and the CDM will lead to increased global GHG emissions. We show that this is a potentially serious problem, due to asymmetric information between project hosts and the regulator, the CDM Executive Board, and to the basic rules for crediting CDM quotas. In certain cases, the use of “relative baselines” to credit CDM quotas could fully eliminate any emissions reductions achieved by CDM projects. Remedies to overcome the problems are discussed. They may involve setting the baseline independently of initial energy intensity and final output for the project; or involve information revelation mechanisms that minimize policy losses and net rent capture by project sponsors.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Knut Einar Rosendahl & Jon Strand, 2009.
"Carbon leakage from the clean development mechanism,"
591, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
- Knut Einar Rosendahl & Jon Strand, 2011. "Carbon Leakage from the Clean Development Mechanism," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 27-50.
- Dutschke, Michael & Michaelowa, Axel, 1998. "Interest groups and efficient design of the clean development mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol," HWWA Discussion Papers 58, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
- Florens Flues & Axel Michaelowa & Katharina Michaelowa, 2010. "What determines UN approval of greenhouse gas emission reduction projects in developing countries?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 1-24, October.
- Hagem, Cathrine, 2009. "The clean development mechanism versus international permit trading: The effect on technological change," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 1-12, January.
- Fischer, Carolyn, 2004.
"Project-Based Mechanisms for Emissions Reductions: Balancing Trade-offs with Baselines,"
dp-04-32, Resources For the Future.
- Fischer, Carolyn, 2005. "Project-based mechanisms for emissions reductions: balancing trade-offs with baselines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(14), pages 1807-1823, September.
- Strand, Jon, 2011.
"Carbon offsets with endogenous environmental policy,"
Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 371-378, March.
- Strand, Jon, 2010. "Carbon offsets with endogenous environmental policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5296, The World Bank.
- Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, June.
- World Bank, 2010. "10 Years of Experience in Carbon Finance : Insights from Working with the Kyoto Mechanisms," World Bank Other Operational Studies 2873, The World Bank.
- M. Germain & A. Magnus & V. Steenberghe, 2007. "How to design and use the clean development mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol? A developing country perspective," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 13-30, September.
- Franz Wirl & Claus Huber & I.O Walker, 1998. "Joint Implementation: Strategic Reactions and Possible Remedies," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(2), pages 203-224, September.
- Axel Michaelowa & Michael Dutschke, 1998. "Interest groups and efficient design of the Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 24-42.
- Greiner, Sandra & Michaelowa, Axel, 2003. "Defining Investment Additionality for CDM projects--practical approaches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 1007-1015, August.
- Cathrine Hagem, 1996. "Joint implementation under asymmetric information and strategic behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(4), pages 431-447, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:34:y:2012:i:4:p:533-548. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.